Abraham Accords: Examining the delicate balance between diplomatic progress and shifting public sentiment in the Gulf states.
Context
The Abraham Accords, brokered in 2020, represent a landmark shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics. These agreements – initially between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, later joined by Morocco and Sudan – normalised diplomatic relations, fostering collaborations in areas like trade, tourism and security. Driven by shared concerns regarding Iran’s regional influence and a desire for economic diversification, the Accords marked a departure from decades of Arab consensus opposing normalisation without a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the Accords are not universally supported within the Arab world. Public opinion, often diverging from official policy, remains a crucial – and sometimes volatile – element shaping the trajectory of these evolving relationships. Sudan’s recent backsliding and ongoing tensions in the region highlight the fragility of the normalisation process and its dependence on sustained, multi-faceted support.
Progress Made
Since their signing, the Abraham Accords have yielded tangible progress. Bilateral trade between Israel and the UAE, for instance, has surpassed $2.5 billion, with projections continuing upwards. This includes collaboration in renewable energy, technology and agriculture. Tourism has experienced a significant boost, with increasing numbers of Israelis visiting the UAE and, to a lesser extent, Morocco. Bahrain and Israel have established diplomatic missions and deepened security cooperation, focusing on countering shared threats.
Beyond economic and security ties, cultural exchanges and people-to-people contact have increased – yet remain largely confined to elites.. Joint initiatives in healthcare, particularly in response to regional health challenges, have also emerged. Furthermore, the Accords have facilitated renewed diplomatic engagement on other regional issues, such as the Red Sea security architecture.
The momentum generated has also spurred discussions with Saudi Arabia. Whilst full normalisation remains unconfirmed, Saudi Arabia has softened its stance toward Israel, including permitting Israeli overflights and opening channels for discreet security cooperation. This gradual engagement builds on existing, albeit quiet, security coordination in the face of perceived Iranian aggression. Importantly, the advances aren’t solely bilateral; trilateral forums, including the Negev Summit in early 2022, demonstrate a growing willingness among multiple parties to collaborate.
Challenges
Despite the progress, significant challenges threaten the sustainability of the Abraham Accords. Perhaps the most prominent is the sustained disconnect between official policy and public sentiment in much of the Gulf. While governments have actively pursued normalisation, polling data indicates that a large proportion of citizens remain deeply sceptical, motivated by solidarity with the Palestinians and historical grievances. This public resistance limits the scope of further normalisation and creates pressure on governments to moderate their approach.
The ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a central obstacle. Recurring escalations in violence, settlement expansion and the lack of a credible peace process fuel public anger and reinforce opposition to normalisation. Any perceived betrayal of Palestinian rights risks triggering a backlash against Gulf states engaged with Israel.
Furthermore, events in Sudan demonstrate the precarity of the Accords. The military coup in 2021 stalled Sudan’s normalisation process, effectively reversing some gains. Economic instability and internal political divisions contributed to this setback. This highlights the importance of domestic stability and clear political commitment to sustain normalisation efforts across the region.
Finally, internal political transitions within the Gulf states themselves – such as the succession in Qatar and potential shifts in leadership elsewhere – could influence the prioritisation of the Accords.
Israel-Iran Dimension
The evolving dynamic between Israel and Iran forms a crucial undercurrent to the Abraham Accords. A shared perception of Iranian threat – stemming from Iran’s nuclear programme, regional proxy networks and ballistic missile development – was a key driver behind the initial impetus for normalisation. Gulf states view a strengthened relationship with Israel as a strategic asset in deterring Iranian aggression and securing their own national interests.
However, this alignment also fosters anxieties. A overt anti-Iran security alignment led by Israel and the US can being viewed as provocative by Iran and could escalate regional tensions. Pressuring Gulf governments to openly align against Tehran risks deepening existing sectarian divisions and exacerbating instability. The recent improvement in relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia adds another layer of complexity. While these improved relations are unlikely to immediately derail the Accords, they potentially reduce the urgency of the Iranian threat narrative that underpinned them.
For Merlows readers, understanding this interplay is vital. Normalisation isn’t simply about Israel and Arab states; it’s an intricate balancing act influenced by broader geopolitical calculations, with Iran constantly factoring into the equation.
Path Forward
Sustaining and expanding the Abraham Accords requires a multifaceted strategy that addresses the underlying challenges. Prioritising people-to-people initiatives beyond elite circles is crucial for fostering genuine understanding and building public support. Investing in joint economic projects that deliver tangible benefits to ordinary citizens can also help to overcome public scepticism.
Crucially, renewed efforts to de-escalate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are necessary. While full resolution is unlikely in the immediate term, practical steps to improve the living conditions of Palestinians, address settlement issues and promote a two-state solution can create a more conducive environment for normalisation.
Governments engaging in normalisation must also proactively address domestic concerns and engage in open dialogue with their citizens. Demonstrating transparency and articulating the benefits of normalised relations can help to build public consensus. Furthermore, maintaining a pragmatic approach to engagement with Iran – avoiding overly provocative actions while safeguarding national security interests – will be essential.
Realistically, achieving further widespread normalisation will be a gradual process. Incremental steps, focusing on incremental improvements in specific areas (such as trade and regional security), are more likely to succeed than ambitious, top-down initiatives.
Source: This report is based on analysis of open-source information concerning regional politics, diplomatic engagements, and publicly available reports on trade and tourism related to the Abraham Accords. It specifically draws upon observed trends aligned with the topic “How public opinion in the Gulf shapes normalisation,” as indicated by the title inspiring this piece. Independent verification of specific polling data cited in the descriptive narrative was not available at the time of writing.
